This explanation is super weird. > No one has challenged the broader focus of Totenberg's original story, which asserts that the justices in general are not ge

This explanation is super weird. > No one has challenged the broader focus of Totenberg's original story, which asserts that the justices in general are not getting along well. The controversy over the anecdotal lead, which was intended to be illustrative, has overwhelmed the uncontested premise of the story. Gorsuch and Sotomayor issued a joint statement that they are warm friends. Doesn’t that challenge the broader focus of the story? How are we supposed to take them seriously unless we want to believe what they’re saying uncritically?